[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] On Naming
|
It's clear that the JCP is a very "heavyweight" process as it is now, but even MicroProfile has shown interest in feeding JSRs for some of their specs (at the moment, only Config).
I believe we can use a similar approach, doing the heavy lifting here and then moving it to the JCP with Eclipse Foundation as the spec lead.
That approach should hardly slow down us or interfere on our processes.
Regards,
Guillermo González de Agüero
Two reasons come to mind:
- There is a strong desire for a lighter-weight, more nimble
process.
- The IP and process rules around the JCP are complex, and
almost impossible to change. The intent will be to create a
new process which provides a level playing field for all of
the participants and stakeholders. A more open and egalitarian
process will hopefully result in more participants and
investment in the platform.
On 2017-10-01 3:52 PM, Michael Nascimento wrote:
Could you expand on the rationale for that, Mike?
Regards,
Michael
_______________________________________________
ee4j-community mailing list
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-community